Published: 09/25/2007, The State

By Joe Biden

In Iraq, the military refers to those who have been killed as fallen angels.

To date, 3,780 of our brave men and women have been killed in action.

How many more angels must fall before this war ends?

In January, the president asked us to support a surge of troops that would give the central government in Iraq breathing room to stand up on its own feet and to bring about political reconciliation between Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds.

Eight months into the surge, the central government is no closer to competence. It is no closer to a political settlement. It has no capacity to deliver services and security. Most critically, it does not have the trust of its people.

And it will not have this ability in our lifetimes.

The surge is at best a stopgap that delays, but will not prevent, chaos.

One hundred thousand Iraqis flee their country every month, in fear of sectarian violence. Those who have remained in Iraq hide in their homes. Wounds, sustained over centuries, continue to burn. Each side in the civil war is thirsting for a shot at revenge against its sworn enemy.

Absent an ...   more »

When asked if all American troops would be home from Iraq by the end of their first term, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, and Barak Obama all stated correctly that they couldn’t commit to that.

Unfortunately, that is a technically correct, nevertheless wrong answer.

Here’s the correct answer:

If I were sworn into office today, I would have all combat troops out of Iraq within one year. We would have troops to maintain security at our embassy in Baghdad, we would have some troops as advisers to the Iraqi government as they request, and some troops in the region, but there would be no troops engaged in combat and the occupation of Iraq would be over. As for January, 2009, President Bush has mismanaged this war. We have no idea what he might do to make matters worse, so I cannot commit to where we will be in January 2013 – the end of my first term – when we have 15 more months of the incompetent and dangerous Bush administration before I will have an opportunity to get started.

by Geoff Staples

The similarities and differences between George W. Bush and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are both striking and informative.

Similarities

Both Bush and President Ahmadinejad are liars.

Both Bush and President Ahmadinejad have strange ideas about religion.

Bush doesn’t believe in evolution and President Ahmadinejad doesn’t believe in the Holocaust.

Differences:

Well, actually, I could only come up with one significant difference:

President Ahmadinejad has the courage to appear before audiences that disdain him. George W. Bush is a coward who only appears in front of audiences of ass-kissing sycophants (with apologies to General Fallon).

Bush thought Saddam was prepared to flee: report

By Jason Webb. Reuters, Wednesday, September 26, 2007; 12:07 PM

MADRID (Reuters) - Saddam Hussein was prepared to take $1 billion and go into exile before the Iraq war, according to a transcript of talks between U.S. President George W. Bush and an ally, Spanish newspaper El Pais reported on Wednesday.

During a meeting at his ranch in Crawford, Texas, on February 22, 2003, Bush told former Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar that Saddam could also be assassinated, according to the transcript published in El Pais in Spanish.

In Washington, White House National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe declined to comment on the report.

"The Egyptians are speaking to Saddam Hussein. It seems he's indicated he would be prepared to go into exile if he's allowed to take $1 billion and all the information he wants about weapons of mass destruction," Bush was quoted as saying at the meeting one month before the U.S.-led invasion.

Asked by Aznar whether Saddam could really leave, Bush replied: "Yes, that possibility exists. Or he might even be assassinated."

A spokesman for Aznar's private foundation had no comment on the transcript or its authenticity. El ...   more »

Bush's False Claims About Children's Health Insurance

September 21, 2007

The president mischaracterizes congressional efforts to expand the SCHIP program.

Summary

President Bush gave a false description of proposed legislation to expand the 10-year-old federal program to provide health insurance for children in low-income working families.

He said it "would result" in covering children in families with incomes up to $83,000 per year, which isn't true. The Urban Institute estimated that 70 percent of children who would gain coverage are in families earning half that amount, and the bill contains no requirement for setting income eligibility caps any higher than what's in the current law. (The compromise bill that was released a few days after Bush's press conference does rescind an administration effort to block New York state from increasing its eligibility cap to that level.)

He also said the program was "meant to help poor children," when in fact Congress stated that it was meant to expand insurance coverage beyond the poor and to cover millions of "low-income" children who were well above the poverty line. Under current law most states cover children at twice or even three times the official poverty level.

The president also says Congress' expansion ...   more »

Before MoveOn's "General Betray Us," there was Limbaugh's "Senator Betrayus"

Summary: Rush Limbaugh has called the MoveOn.org "General Petraeus or General Betray Us?" advertisement "contemptible" and "indecent," but months earlier, on his radio show, he told his audience that he had a new name for Senator Chuck Hagel: "Senator Betrayus." Though Limbaugh has taken exception to accusations that he has attacked the patriotism of his political opponents, the "Senator Betrayus" remark is one of several instances in which Limbaugh has done so.

On September 10, MoveOn.org's much-discussed advertisement headlined "General Petraeus or General Betray Us?" critical of Gen. David Petraeus, appeared in The New York Times. On the September 11 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh called the advertisement "contemptible" and "indecent." However, months earlier, on his radio show, he told his audience that he had a new name for Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE): "Senator Betrayus."

Media Matters - Before MoveOn's "General Betray Us," there was Limbaugh's "Senator Betrayus".